• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

The thread which sometimes talks about RDNA2

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.amd.com/en/gaming/graphics-gaming-benchmarks ;) enjoy :D


Something fishy going on with AMDs benchmarks for the 3080 and 3090 if you use Techpowerups benchmarks and match them up the same with same settings and API.

They say they were all run on the x570 motherboard and 5900x CPU, but the figures for the 3080 and 3090 should be better as it's a better cpu than they used in their test setup which is a 9900k..

So the 3080 and 3090 results should be better than techpowerups but they read a lot worse and the 6900 xt, 6800 xt and 6800 humm if you match up the numbers to known benchmarks of the 3080 and 3090. I hope AMD are not playing us for fools.. Anyways link there from their benchmarks and use your favourite site with benchmarks to compare.
 
Last edited:
Damn the 6800 is almost as fast as the 3070 in SoTTR with ray tracing enabled.. And the 3070 had DLSS enabled!

In other words, it's faster.

DLSS annoys me. More specifically the way "4K DLSS" is compared with genuine native 4K rendering when it's nothing of the sort. Rendering at a lower resolution and then upscaling, no matter how clever the upscaling is, is totally different from native 4K rendering performance and the two should never be compared in benchmarks.

So ignoring the DLSS figures completely, then if those figures are to be believed, RT does look promising on Big Navi.
 
If you actually check the twitter pics, you'd realize yourself that the AMD results aren't with ULTRA preset (for the other settings) like wcctech implies. The ultra symbol (which you can see at the first texture setting ) cannot be found in any of the other settings, it's also running no AA, no screen effects, no Lens flares and High not ULTRA LOD and a few other different settings, unlike the NV which is maxed out.

In other words, 6800 will be close to 2080ti RT perf WITHOUT DLSS (which means it's good, but not great as the article implies) , but hey, keep hyping yourself up, this is going into the old 480 beating 980ti territory.
sZQM6gK.jpg



Also

My 2080 @ 1440p comparable to the twitter pics settings - NO DLSS (menu like i mentioned before is full 3440x1440 native, game was run at 2560x1440 and it stretched). A 2080ti will easily get to the same 80 fps with RT on.

BBLbiRg.jpg
 
Last edited:
Normally I don't like to spend much more then £500 on a gpu but they purposely set the 6800xt in that "oh but for a little more you can get this" range, and I might be suckered into it.
 
In other words, it's faster.

DLSS annoys me. More specifically the way "4K DLSS" is compared with genuine native 4K rendering when it's nothing of the sort. Rendering at a lower resolution and then upscaling, no matter how clever the upscaling is, is totally different from native 4K rendering performance and the two should never be compared in benchmarks.

So ignoring the DLSS figures completely, then if those figures are to be believed, RT does look promising on Big Navi.

Got to agree, we all used to laugh at consoles and their claimed 4k / 60fps and lord up on true resolutions we get on PC. Then DLSS came along and all of a sudden it's amazing?

When are they actually out/independent reviews happening? Can't see a date in all the info flying around.
 
Normally I don't like to spend much more then £500 on a gpu but they purposely set the 6800xt in that "oh but for a little more you can get this" range, and I might be suckered into it.

Same pal. Although it should last at least three years if I did splash out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom